VIC Another wear & tear & bond question

My friend has been told that a tenant in his IP is not looking after the place and the PM is suggesting he give her notice. There are drawings all over the walls from a child and stains all over the carpet to an extent the place will need to be repainted and recarpeted prior to retenanting the property. However, the PM says she cannot withhold the bond as the paint and carpet are over 7 years old. I have never heard this condition before and could not see any mention in the residential tenancy handbook. Since the tenant is currently paying her rent and the damage is already done, it seems kind of pointless to force her out now and be hit up for several thousand dollars in repairs.

I think the PM is really suggesting he throws her out as the body corporate has complained that the yard is messy and she doesn't want to deal with the body corporate. She has shown next to no concern regarding other issues, which only affect the owner. It was originally rented to this tenant as a single person, but now there is a child and also a dog, which has only just been mentioned now that it has been found to be part of the cause for the carpet damage as it hasn't been kept outside as was apparently agreed with the tenant, but never discussed with the landlord.

Any thoughts on the supposed 7 year rule on damage to walls, carpets? Would you throw her out or just kick the can down the road till she leaves on her own?

 

There’s no “7 year rule”. It’s just that carpets are depreciated over their effective life (according to ATO schedule) and they have virtually reached that stage.

I’d imagine that the walls would need to be cleaned by the tenant (but not repainted).

Personally I’d terminate the tenancy, replace floor coverings and repaint before putting in a new tenant.

 

I'd start by getting a new PM, this one has issues.
After an inspection/asessment from the new property manager, get the place cleaned up (by tenant) and reinspect in person with new PM.
If they are then OK, no probs.
Easier to change PM than tenant and a lot cheaper.
Also, in some markets there is high vacancy atm.

 

Bingo! haha

 

No seven year rule in Victoria, although if an issue went to VCAT they will depreciate it and sometimes that will mean you won't get anything in this situation, despite it really not being wear and tear.

I agree though that the PM should give you pros and cons of each and explain what may need to be done once the tenant has vacated. So agree new PM

 

If the body corporate have complained, what have they specifically complained about, and what has the tenant done to alleviate the complaint?

 

Apparently they complained that the yard is a mess and the tenant has done nothing to alleviate this. The PM didn't provide photos, so I don't really know what they mean.

 

The pm should be handling the garden with the tenant (reminding them of their obligations, negotiating / nagging, if they are that bad, breach notice)

VCAT generally allows a 10 year life time so if it costs the owner $1000 to fix, they might get $300 back.

If the rent is paid on time, and no damage is being caused (beyond still working out how to sort out the kid drawing on walls), then it might be worth just upping the rent until they do move out. Attitude is important and a good PM could talk you through and advise on this.

If the tenant doesn’t care about the house or what the kid does though, best to remove as the bigger an out of control kid gets, writing on walls will become holes... not worth the risk

 

Maybe the body corporate or strata committee, assuming there is one, should send a breach notice to the tenant, so the tenant pulls their finger out and does a cleanup.

 

Often they do, but the breach goes on the owners account, not the tenants. It’s then the PMs job to notify the tenant or seek reimbursement for any fines issued. (Most OCs are very quick with their fines... extra revenue.)

 

I'm not sure what the regs are in Vic but one would think that if the tenant has crap all over the place and a dog, then a breach notice of some kind would be issued by the body corporate, which may put the tenant in breach of their lease provisions. (Note that depending on whether the dog has been approved or not and/or is or is not causing noise issues, then this may be matter of major, little or no relevance to the body corporate, depending on the by-laws).

And, if necessary, and if the tenant is not inclined to rectify the breach, then the body corporate might breach the lot owner...